Re: Social Contract GR's Affect on sarge

[Raul Miller <moth@debian.org>]

On Mon, Apr 26, 2004 at 03:21:25PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> The DFSG says "The program must include source code."  So for works
> which are programs, we know how to apply that.
> 
> The new Social Contract makes clear that this is to apply to
> non-programs also.  But how, since "source code" is a term that
> normally refers only to programs?  Well, one way would be to take the
> GPL's definition of "source code".  But we need not do that, and there
> are compelling reasons not to.

Oh?

If we take "program" to mean "a sequence of instructions that a computer
can interpret and execute", then it's reasonable to consider a font file
as instructions on how to render characters in that font.

I think you could argue that a font file is not a program expressed in
a turing-complete langauge, but that hardly seems a relevant issue here.

Perhaps you had some other definition in mind for "program"?  If so,
which one?

[It's not sufficient to merely declare that some definition is inadequate
-- you must also supply a better definition.]

Thanks,

-- 
Raul